Re: building libpq.a static library

On 13 July 2017 at 10:58, Craig Ringer <craig(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> wrote:

> On 12 July 2017 at 23:46, Jeroen Ooms <jeroen(at)berkeley(dot)edu> wrote:
>
>> On Wed, Jul 12, 2017 at 5:11 PM, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
>> > Jeroen Ooms <jeroen(at)berkeley(dot)edu> writes:
>> >> I maintain static libraries for libpq for the R programming language
>> >> (we need static linking to ship with the binary packages).
>> >
>> > How do you get that past vendor packaging policies? When I worked at
>> > Red Hat, there was a very strong policy against allowing any package
>> > to statically embed parts of another one, because it creates serious
>> > management problems if e.g. the other one needs a security update.
>> > I'm sure Red Hat isn't the only distro that feels that way.
>>
>> We only use this on Windows. On platforms with a decent package
>> manager we indeed link to a shared library.
>
>
> You shouldn't ever need static libraries on Windows, though. Because it
> searches the CWD first on its linker search path
>

Er, sorry, binary location, not CWD.

>
> --
Craig Ringer http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training & Services